Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read it

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/12/harvard-edcast-grading-equity

I'm not sure whether he realizes that the unavoidable conclusion of his argument for accuracy is that you shouldn't grade students at all during the year but just administer a final exam, and that will be the grade.
The problem with that approach is that the vast majority of students have very low self-regulation skills and won't do any work if they're not constantly badgered to do it. The idea of not grading homework and convincing students that they need to do it to learn only works with the kids who knew that in the first place.

I've had several articles come up on my news feed from teachers saying that they've stopped grading entirely. And how happy they are!

Those are some lazy teachers. If you don't grade, check work for accuracy then how do you know if your students are learning?

I am a tough grader. Out of 60 students, only 6 had A's in reading. My standards are high. However, I have the highest growth rate on district and standardized tests in my school every year. I also have the highest growth for Black and low income students. My data says "exceeds expectations" for those groups. When you look at teachers who have half their class with A's but their data says students are not showing growth is evidence that kids rise to high expectations.

I am ready for the attacks

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read it

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/12/harvard-edcast-grading-equity

I'm not sure whether he realizes that the unavoidable conclusion of his argument for accuracy is that you shouldn't grade students at all during the year but just administer a final exam, and that will be the grade.
The problem with that approach is that the vast majority of students have very low self-regulation skills and won't do any work if they're not constantly badgered to do it. The idea of not grading homework and convincing students that they need to do it to learn only works with the kids who knew that in the first place.

I've had several articles come up on my news feed from teachers saying that they've stopped grading entirely. And how happy they are!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not so much about not allowing late work but more about eliminating a grade for homework, classwork and class participation. The idea is that a kid who fails to routinely do that type of work has a low grade for those areas, and even if he aced a test, his grade is still brought way down. By eliminating all of the other non major work grades, and focusing just on the major work grades, the students are graded solely on what they know, not what they are still mastering. That means if a kid gets a B on a quiz but an A on the test, the quiz is thrown out because the test showed mastery.

Obviously, this hurts the students who put the effort in from the beginning because he gets no credit for that and no grade buffer added in to help raise a lower test grade. Other HSs in FCPS already do this. It should be universal throughout FCPS one way or another and I would prefer it gone.

My niece attends a school that uses this. As a former teacher, I hate it. It punishes the kids who are hard workers but maybe not all As all the time.

It is not obvious to me. If you are able, please explain how it hurts those students.

Read my last sentence. A kid who has all across the board on everything, will not be impacted. The kid who does not, will be. For example:

John gets As on every assignment and ends the year with an A.

Mary gets a low A- on two major assessments, a low A on one major assessment and 100s on homework, classwork, class participation, small quizzes, etc. Mary ends up with an A-. (Replace A- with all other grades lower than an A).

Now, during college application times, Mary's A- or whatever lower grade she has - is compared to other schools who provide that booster to grades which results in both Mary and John getting As on their transcripts when the Marys of those schools earned the same grades as the Mary in this school. If it is universal, it hurts less. If it is not universal, this hurts more. The only ones who really have a benefit from this are the kids who do little to no underlying work. They can end up with a C rather than a D or a B rather than a C.

I did not ask the question but none of this makes sense. John and Mary are fine.

Summary: it hurts the a-, b+, and b kids the most.

Correct it generally hurts nice umc white kids the most aka people who get higher grades because they do all the work not because they necessarily know the material the best

Again the final product aka test is what matters.

And to the DCUM crowd this is how college works so it's just preparing folks, where in some classes a mid-term and a final are all you get.

Colleges are watering down their courses and their grading, too. If they fail all the unprepared and unstudious students, they won't get any money and then they'd have to close.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:School is not a competition. The sooner people realize this, the better. The goal of public school is to have kids graduate with a basic level of competency in all areas.

Do you have kids?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read it

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/12/harvard-edcast-grading-equity

I'm not sure whether he realizes that the unavoidable conclusion of his argument for accuracy is that you shouldn't grade students at all during the year but just administer a final exam, and that will be the grade.
The problem with that approach is that the vast majority of students have very low self-regulation skills and won't do any work if they're not constantly badgered to do it. The idea of not grading homework and convincing students that they need to do it to learn only works with the kids who knew that in the first place.

I've had several articles come up on my news feed from teachers saying that they've stopped grading entirely. And how happy they are!

Anonymous wrote:My DD is dreading next year bc of this (an LBSS student like Op's kid).

She says it's unfair to her and her peers who actually work hard, study, do homework (AND turn it on time), and give their 100%, but the grades won't reflect that bc it'll be watered down and shifted. All bc the teachers/fcps dont want the slackers and lazy bums and others don't look bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not so much about not allowing late work but more about eliminating a grade for homework, classwork and class participation. The idea is that a kid who fails to routinely do that type of work has a low grade for those areas, and even if he aced a test, his grade is still brought way down. By eliminating all of the other non major work grades, and focusing just on the major work grades, the students are graded solely on what they know, not what they are still mastering. That means if a kid gets a B on a quiz but an A on the test, the quiz is thrown out because the test showed mastery.

Obviously, this hurts the students who put the effort in from the beginning because he gets no credit for that and no grade buffer added in to help raise a lower test grade. Other HSs in FCPS already do this. It should be universal throughout FCPS one way or another and I would prefer it gone.

My niece attends a school that uses this. As a former teacher, I hate it. It punishes the kids who are hard workers but maybe not all As all the time.

It is not obvious to me. If you are able, please explain how it hurts those students.

Anonymous wrote:Guessing this is standards based grading. My gradebook would have a column for each skill the kids must demonstrate mastery of, on a scale of 1-4. If you don't get a 3 or a 4 you have to keep re-attempting that skill until you can show you know it.

For algebra 1:
--Solve equation using the distributive property
--solve equation with variables on both sides
--solve equation involving rational expressions
--solve an equation with infinite or no solutions

Rather than the current: "Unit 2 test - equations"

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read it

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/12/harvard-edcast-grading-equity

I'm not sure whether he realizes that the unavoidable conclusion of his argument for accuracy is that you shouldn't grade students at all during the year but just administer a final exam, and that will be the grade.
The problem with that approach is that the vast majority of students have very low self-regulation skills and won't do any work if they're not constantly badgered to do it. The idea of not grading homework and convincing students that they need to do it to learn only works with the kids who knew that in the first place.

Anonymous wrote:Read it

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/news/19/12/harvard-edcast-grading-equity

Anonymous wrote:Dear FCPS families,

We thought our school system was bad. Yours is a joke.

Signed,

LCPS families

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS is proposing to scrap their version of Equity Grading...hoping fcps does the same thing.

Source?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:APS is proposing to scrap their version of Equity Grading...hoping fcps does the same thing.

Source?

Anonymous wrote:I did not read all the pages, but here are my thoughts: perhaps Braddock is seeing an issue wherein students are just giving up on learning altogether. Failed a test? No chance of getting a better grade? Then the students quit. Maybe Braddock’s goal is to have students actually learn something. It’s not really about getting the best grades — it’s getting the kids to learn. If they can do that with “equity learning,” then perhaps their student population is better off in the end than just from quitting or dropping out of school. Maybe enough students there are at risk of failing altogether, that equity learning makes sense.